Reply #76: If you really think that, then at least one of us has misunderstood my post. [View All]

[Boojatta]

But you essentially enforced my point that there can be no objective standard of ethics.

The simplicity of that statement suggests that the title of this thread should be rewritten. It seems rather obvious that there can be an objective system of ethics. The question is whether or not a given objective system of ethics is actually correct. However, from the point of view of those who deny that it means anything to say that a given system of ethics is correct or incorrect, there doesn't seem to be a danger of being wrong. From their point of view, what is the danger? Is it the danger of wasting time studying what might turn out to be merely a completely arbitrary human fabrication?

I presume that you in fact have some notions of ethics and that you do not deliberately do things that you consider to be unethical. So it would be possible to attempt to clarify your own notions of ethics. I suppose you could protest on the grounds that you might be wrong, but you can't protest on these grounds if you deny that there is any right or wrong to the matter. Perhaps you could protest that some person might think that you are wrong. However, it seems that you have already decided that such a person is naive and mistaken in thinking that it is possible to be wrong about such a thing.